MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1989569874 · doi:10.1353/atj.2008.0006

Shakespeare in China (review)

2008· article· en· W1989569874 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Stewart Hawley

Bibliographic record

VenueAsian Theatre Journal · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicPhilippine History and Culture
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsChinaZhàngPoliticsLiteratureHistoryThe RenaissanceClassicsArtArt historyLawPolitical scienceArchaeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Reviewed by: Shakespeare in China Stewart Hawley Shakespeare in China. By Murray J. Levith. New York: Continuum, 2004. xiv + 156 pp. Cloth $39.95. Murray Levith, Shakespearean scholar and author of Shakespeare's Italian Settings and Plays, What's in Shakespeare's Names, and Renaissance and Modern, takes on a significant challenge in his new book Shakespeare in China, in which he broadly traces the history of Shakespeare in the country from first translations in the early twentieth century to the PRC's second Shakespeare festival in 1994. Levith focuses on the many translations of Shakespeare works into Chinese. So, those interested in studying the political and cultural events that helped spawn interest in Chinese translations of Shakespeare will find this book is a great place to start. This book does include information about various Shakespearean productions, but limits its focus to dates, places, and the translation used for the perfomance. Those interested in the staging of Shakespeare in China should go to Li Ruru's book Shashibya: Staging Shakespeare in China (Vancouver: University of British Columbia, 2003), which gives details on significant Shakespearean productions. Each of Levith's seven chapters is broken into two important sections: the translations and the notable productions of the plays. Unlike other books, such as Xiao Zhang's Shakespeare in China: A Comparative Study of Two Traditions and Cultures (Newark: University of Delaware, 1996) that speaks of the profound impact of Shakespeare on China, Levith presents a more conventional approach to the Bard's rocky relationship with China. While Zhang's book bypasses how the Chinese came to interpret Shakespeare works, Levith relates the generally slow process and, more recently, growing impact that Shakespeare's work had in the country. Levith's book takes an extensive look at the numerous endeavors over the twentieth century to translate the complete works. Levith compellingly tells of how translations often completely change the title of the play to fit with Chinese codes. Thus Two Gentlemen of Verona [End Page 163] becomes Proteus Betrays His Good Friend for the Sake of Gratifying His Lust. The Merchant of Venice becomes Antonio Borrows Money by Agreeing to Have His Flesh Cut. Levith argues that these adapted titles show what the Chinese hold to be the focus of the play. He further argues that the renaming of Shakespeare's plays is typical. Levith offers a long list of plays whose titles have been altered and lightly touches on the reasons for the title changes. The reason for revamping the titles he relates to Confucian ideas of honor and family. Integration of these ideas into the plays allows the script to be accepted by Chinese. He notes what he considers the most important translations of Shakespeare. The first work he notes is Professor Liang's 1936 translation, which included fifteen of Shakespeare's plays. However Levith, also points out the controversy surrounding this translation. Some critics such as Cao Weifeng claim Liang's translations are only the stories and without concern for the poetry. Other critics attack Liang's work on ideological grounds for his beliefs in the universality of Shakespeare, which came to be considered a bourgeoisie approach. For these reasons Liang's translation is seldom studied or used for production in the PRC today. One of the most important translators of Shakespeare in China Zhu Shenghao is discussed at great length. Zhu completed thirty-one of Shakespeare's plays in 1944, and his translations are the most widely used in Chinese Shakespeare production. Levith notes that "Zhu's translations are considered the best because of its [sic] fluency and sensitivity to Shakespeare's nuances and diction as well as word play." This would have been a good place to demonstrate the finesse of Zhu's translation and compare it with others, by giving examples of how the works differ, but Levith ignores the opportunity and goes on to spend the next half of the book talking about Shakespeare's plays in production, which makes one wonder if Levith has sufficient Chinese to allow the discussions of such translations. A small section of the book deals with historical accounts of Shakespearean productions in China. Here, Levith goes into great detail about...

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.948
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.016
GPT teacher head0.275
Teacher spread0.259 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAsian Theatre JournalSame topicPhilippine History and CultureFrench-language works237,207